Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:57:52 -0700 (PDT) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> To: Ed Maste <emaste@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Enabling the WITH_REPRODUCIBLE_BUILD knob for 12.0-REL Message-ID: <201809101757.w8AHvque079079@pdx.rh.CN85.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <CAPyFy2A44TdURhQM7hqXxyuUBPRK8NmdybAxj5KSSHJ9rFFNMg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On 10 September 2018 at 12:51, Rodney W. Grimes > <freebsd-rwg@pdx.rh.cn85.dnsmgr.net> wrote: > > > > Why not just turn this on and leave it on? > > I know a number of developers want to keep the metadata for their own > builds at least. And we do not really know what the users position is on this... and developers also run on stable/X, they may not like this flipped there, though IMHO we should not be catering so much to developers, while shooting users. > > We have essentially three different levels of metadata that are > arguably sensible: > > 1. Major/minor version, release/branch name, architecture > 2. Version control information > 3. Path, user, date, time, host > > And three kinds of working trees: > > 1. Non-versioned with/without modifications (e.g., a src tarball) > 2. git/svn/other checkout, without modifications > 3. git/svn/other checkout, with modifications > > What I'm proposing for 12.0 gives us 1+2 always (regardless of the > state of the tree). > > I think there's more discussion to be had on the mapping between the > tree type/state and amount of metadata to include. If we come to a > consensus I'll handle it, but don't want to hold up a change destined > for 12.0 with a broader discussion. I think there is more discussion to be had before we flip this knob anyplace. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201809101757.w8AHvque079079>